MHE615 E-Marketing Unit Learning Outcomes ⦁ Critically reflect upon the value of e-marketing in relation to strategic marketing plans. ⦁ Evaluate the technological, legal, ethical, global and social networking aspects of the e-business marketing environment. ⦁ Critically review how the internet impacts consumer behaviour, and make judgements on how a hotel can use this information for marketing purposes. ⦁ Analyse online distribution and supply dynamics and identify opportunities and threats for hotel organisations. ⦁ Generate and justify e-marketing ideas, concepts and solutions, through case analysis. Assessment Summary Assessment Type Weighting Due Learning Outcomes 1. Individual Report (3000 words) 40% Week 8 a, b, c, d 2. Case Analysis Group Report (5000 words) 60% Week 10 a, b, c, d, e Assessment 1–Individual Report – 3000 Words (Due Friday Week 8, 5pm) Shen (2015) provides insight into examples of critical success factors for hotels. These critical factors (see Figure 1 on the next page) make a relevant and insightful starting point for discussing the relationship between eMarketing initiatives and factors that might be impacted by an organisation’s broader marketing strategies and business modelling. In context to the course material covered (and will be covering until week 5) select a minimum of 3 critical success factors (from Figure 1) and apply them to an organisation of your choice. You are to complete a report that will analyse the relationship between a hotel’s eMarketing initiatives and factors that relate to broader marketing and business strategies / models. In your report, provide a brief overview of your chosen hotel and the industry in general that it operates within. The following questions should be addressed in the body of the report: ⦁ EvaluateeMarketing initiatives thatwould complement your choice of critical success factors? ⦁ Analyse how your selection ofeMarketing initiatives vary from one critical success factor to the next? ⦁ Critique how might the wrong or ineffective eMarketing initiative(s) undermine your selection of critical success factors? For example, if one of your critical success factors was product quality would selecting an unsuitable eMarketing initiative lead to cost over-runs and impact customer purchasing requirements? Please note, that figure 1 can be applied to restaurants and other service providers. By no means are the choice of organisations from these industries to be excluded. Reprinted from Critical Success Factors for Leading Hotel Brands in Asia: A Case Study of Banyan Tree by H. Shen, 2015, International Journal of Marketing Studies, 7(3), p. 21. Copyright 2015 by the Canadian Center of Science and Education. Adapted with permission. *Global Business Management students may select an organisation that is not a hotel Assessment Criteria for Individual Report Criteria: The outcome shows: Fail = Unsatisfactory performance- Pass = Just Satisfactory performance Credit= Good quality showing more than satisfactory performance Distinction= Superior quality demonstrating independent thinking High Distinction= Outstanding quality showing creativity and originality Use of literature/evidence of reading 20% Either no evidence of literature being consulted or irrelevant to the assignment set. Literature is presented uncritically, in a purely descriptive way and indicates limitations of understanding. Clear evidence and application of readings relevant to the subject; uses indicative texts identified. Able to critically appraise the literature and theory gained from a variety of sources, developing own ideas in the process. Has developed and justified using own ideas based on a wide range of sources which have been thoroughly analysed, applied and discussed. Knowledge of theory 20% Inaccurate or inappropriate choice of theory. Selection of theory is appropriate but some aspects have been missed or misconstrued.. Most key theories are included in the work in an appropriate straightforward manner. Insightful and appropriate selection of theory in key areas. Assignment demonstrates integration and innovation in the selection and handling of theory. Analysis 20% Fails to analyse information. Can analyse a limited range of information with guidance using classification / principles. Can analyse with guidance using given classification / principles. Can analyse a range of information with minimum guidance, can apply major theories and compare alternative methods/techniques for obtaining data. Can analyse new and/or abstract data and situations without guidance using a wide range of techniques appropriate to the topic. Conclusions 20% Unsubstantiated/invalid conclusions based on anecdote and generalisation only, or no conclusions at all. Limited evidence of findings and conclusions supported by theory/literature. Evidence of findings and conclusions grounded in theory/literature. Good development shown in summary of arguments based in theory/literature. Analytical and clear conclusions well grounded in theory and literature showing development of new concepts. Criteria: The outcome shows: Fail = Unsatisfactory performance- Pass = Just Satisfactory performance Credit= Good quality showing more than satisfactory performance Distinction= Superior quality demonstrating independent thinking High Distinction= Outstanding quality showing creativity and originality Presentation and Referencing 20% • Unsatisfactory level of presentation quality. • None or almost no photos, diagrams etc. • Incompetent level of understanding of relevant software. • No evidence of any significant idea for presentation. • Incorrect citing. • No and/or very poor reference list. • Presentation quality to a minimal level. • Somewhat reasonable level of graphic use: very few photos, diagrams etc., however no context. • Very little evidence of an idea for the presentation. • Somewhat reasonable understanding of the relevant software. • Incorrect citing. • Poor reference list. • Presentation quality to a competent level. • Reasonable level of graphic use, some photos, diagrams, drawings etc. • Reasonable evidence of an idea for presentation. • Reasonable understanding of the relevant software. • Appropriate citing and reference list. • Very effective presentation quality. • Good use of graphics. • Good level of understanding of the relevant software. • Good citing and reference list. • Variety of sources • Excellent use of graphics (photos, diagrams, tools etc.) • Superior understanding of the relevant software. • Extremely creative presentation ideas well resolved and implemented. • Excellent citing and reference list. • Wide variety of quality sources. Mark range out of 100 0- 49.5 50 - 64 65 -74 75-84 85+ Assessment Criteria for Group Report Criteria: The outcome shows: Fail = Unsatisfactory performance- Pass = Just Satisfactory performance Credit= Good quality showing more than satisfactory performance Distinction= Superior quality demonstrating independent thinking High Distinction= Outstanding quality showing creativity and originality Problem Solving Formulation and scope of problem 10% The problem is not formulated clearly. Does not present reasonable review of solutions. The problem formulation exists but is unclear in some respects and does not appear to be well thought out. Offers solutions but they are not clear and rational overall. The problem formulation is clear, but the scope is not well defined. There is a clear, defensible rationale to the problem is offered. Problem formulation is clear. Clear, defensible rationale for the ordering of the alternatives to the problem. Problem formulation is clear and well thought out. The problem scope is well defined. Clear and comprehensive summary of the reasoning that led to the solutions offered. Thinking and Analysis 20% Fails to analyse information. Lacks critical thought /analysis / reference to theory. Can analyse a limited range of information with guidance using classification / principles. Some evidence of critical thought/critical analysis and rationale for work. Can analyse with guidance using given classification / principles. Demonstrates application of theory through critical analysis of the topic area. Can analyse a range of information with minimum guidance, can apply major theories and compare alternative methods/techniques for obtaining data. Clear application of theory through critical analysis/critical thought of the topic area. Can analyse new and/or abstract data and situations without guidance using a wide range of techniques appropriate to the topic. Consistently demonstrates application of critical analysis well integrated in the text. Content Knowledge and range of topic and theory 30% Lacks evidence of knowledge relevant to the topic and/or significantly misuses terminology. Inappropriate choice of theory. Evidence of limited knowledge of topic and some use of appropriate terminology. Selection of theory is Inaccurate appropriate but some aspects have been missed or misconstrued. Has given a factual and/or conceptual knowledge base and appropriate terminology. Most key theories are included in the work in an appropriate straightforward manner. Reasonable knowledge of topic and an awareness of a variety of ideas/contexts/frame-works. Insightful and appropriate selection of theory in key areas. Comprehensive/detailed knowledge of topic with areas of specialisation is depth and awareness of provisional nature of knowledge. Assignment demonstrates integration and innovation in the selection and handling of theory. Criteria: The outcome shows: Fail = Unsatisfactory performance- Pass = Just Satisfactory performance Credit= Good quality showing more than satisfactory performance Distinction= Superior quality demonstrating independent thinking High Distinction= Outstanding quality showing creativity and originality References Source Listing Source Selection Number of Sources 20% • Fewer than 10% of the sources listed are referred to in the text, or no list of references • Sources are random and do not relate to the topic • Number of sources chosen is clearly insufficient to support the argument Fewer than 10% of citations are formatted correctly. • Fewer than 75% of the sources listed are referred to in the text. • Few sources included with little connection to the topic • Number of is less than adequate to fully support the argument Fewer than 75% of citations are formatted correctly. • More than 75% of the listed sources are referred to in the text. • Similar sources and source types included, clearly related to the topic • Number of sources chosen is adequate but could be expanded. More than 75% of citations are formatted correctly. Some information may be missing, or APA style may not be used consistently. • Includes all and only those sources referred to in the text. • Includes a variety of sources, clearly related to the topic. • Number of sources chosen provides abundant evidence to support the argument. More than 90% of citations formatted correctly using APA style. Very comprehensive. Exceptional list of references. Writing structure and style 20% • Inappropriate vocabulary and/or grammar • >7 grammatical and/or spelling errors • Some inappropriate vocabulary and/or grammar • 3-6 grammatical and/or spelling errors • Minor use of inappropriate vocabulary and grammatical structures • 1-2 grammatical and/or spelling errors • Appropriate vocabulary and grammatical structures used • No grammatical and/or spelling errors • Mature writing style using appropriate vocabulary and grammatical structures • No grammatical and/or spelling errors Mark range out of 100 0- 49.5 50 - 64 65 -74 75-84 85+